Four-nation coalition emerges as alternative to Belt Road

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been around for almost four and a half years. So far, New Zealand’s participation has been relatively passive, though no doubt various organisations involved in our international engagement are working to connect us with the BRI.

While the world is now more used to China’s initiatives, and more countries are keen to get involved with China in different ways, the motivations and ambiguities around the BRI make it harder for New Zealand and other developed countries (and a few developing ones) to jump in.

Geographically, the Belt refers to the Silk Road Economic Belt that stretches across Central China, West Asia, the Middle East and all the way to Western Europe. The Road refers to the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road that links China’s eastern coast to Southeast Asia, and eventually the Persian Gulf.

The five major goals of the BRI are: policy co-ordination, facilities connectivity, unimpeded trade, financial integration, and peopleto-people bonds.

Given this range of goals, it is hard not to get confused as to what the BRI is trying to achieve.

In a nutshell, a seamless world with fewer hurdles will always be a better place.

But the implementation methodologies of the BRI are not clear either. That is probably because China is reluctant to label it as a ‘China-led’ initiative for fear of lack of uptake.

The fact that BRI is often associated with infrastructural development is testimonial to the

It does feel like a coalition may emerge based on the old adage that 'your enemy's enemy is your friend'.

lack of understanding of its grand strategy.

Technological partnerships, management systems and many other mechanisms that facilitate engagement have taken a back seat.

As far as New Zealand organisations are concerned, these other innovation and serviceoriented engagements are right up their alley.

In the midst of the state of confusion surrounding how some countries can participate in the BRI, a report has been published which suggests that India, Japan, Australia, and the US are working on an alternative.

It goes on to say that China’s growing presence in the global economy in the form of the BRI needs a counter-balance.

Interestingly, these four countries are the same ones experiencing bilateral challenges with China.

India definitely has no intention of joining the BRI. It does not help, given the differences between India and Pakistan, that China has revitalised the ChinaPakistan Economic Corridor as part of the BRI.

While Japan has softened its stance on participating in the BRI, the history between China and Japan suggests that Japan will not want to play second fiddle to China.

Last year, Australia refused to sign a memorandum of agreement with China over the BRI. In recent times, there have also been many trade battles between China and Australia.

The story between China and the US is multi-faceted. But a fullblown trade war is unlikely.

While there have not been any details around the alternative to BRI, it does feel like a coalition may emerge based on the old adage that ‘your enemy’s enemy is your friend’. ❚ Siah Hwee Ang is the BNZ chair in business in Asia and also chairs the enabling our Asia-Pacific trading nation distinctiveness theme at Victoria University.